Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
BobbyManc said:
We've heard that before, though. Labour will definitely not get a majority on their own but there's no reason why an election would not result in a composition more favourable to opposing No Deal and/or Remain. It's the only solution as I see it. I don't see why the Lib Dems fear a GE but seem so willing for a second referendum. There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged. What then? To me, it makes most sense to try and get a more favourable alliance in the HoC before a referendum on the basis that you might not get the answer you want.
Click to expand...

The fact that you've heard it before is no counter argument on its own.

I explained to you why the Lib Dems fear a GE before a Referendum. Because the two major parties are pro-Brexit and they have a lot of loyal, generational voters in a way the Remain parties don't. Not to mention media exposure and funding donations. Something reflected in how they (Tory + Labour) currently control 558/650 MPs which is not indicative of how the country voted in the referendum (48/52). There's no indication that Lib Dems, SNP, Greens and various Independents will create enough swing in a GE to form a coalition of their own in the HoC. However it only requires a very small swing to upturn the result of the referendum.

As for your statement "There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged".... that holds 0 ground. Because it certainly won't be the same question asked. We're past Leave - Remain. There's 3 options now: Revoke, Sign the WAB, No Deal. Which of the 3 (maybe all 3?) we would see in a ballot would be the subject of negotiation. Obviously Lib Dems want to see no-deal removed and that's part of the price for supporting an interim govt.

So please, explain to me how a 2nd Ref with no-deal off the table could deliver worse results for Remainers and the Lib Dems than a GE? The worst case scenario of such a 2nd Referendum (WAB signing) is actually a better result than Corbyn trying his own hand at Brexit over the next 3-4 years. In fact, even with all 3 options on the ballot and an STV system, the chance of a no-deal result would be considerably smaller than the chance of another Tory govt emerging from the GE to push ahead with no-deal.
 
Last edited:
Skills said:
I think he wants a no-deal. Will want to go down as the PM who actually delivered what the people voted for. Regardless of consequences.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. I suspect Deal is a more electorally positive message, especially if he's been careful to prep the ground with all sorts of no deal bad consequences beforehand (while pretending it's not true/leaked by Hammond). He's a useless administrator but he is better at this kind of manipulative shit than May was. I think if he reckons if he preps the ground right, he can get a fudged WA through (fudged on the details not the fundamentals) and rebadged as something else, and go to the country on it. Everyone gives a sigh of relief, he finds some way to buy off Farage who wants nothing more than to be inside the tent, and he wins the applause.

And if he doesn't, well he gets to blame everyone else, and go to the country on that. But I think the former is what he'd prefer.
 
Last edited:
MadMike said:
The fact that you've heard it before is no counter argument on its own.

I explained to you why the Lib Dems fear a GE before a Referendum. Because the two major parties are pro-Brexit and they have a lot of loyal, generational voters in a way the Remain parties don't. Not to mention media exposure and funding donations. Something reflected in how they (Tory + Labour) currently control 558/650 MPs which is not indicative of how the country voted in the referendum (48/52). There's no indication that Lib Dems, SNP, Greens and various Independents will create enough swing in a GE to form a coalition of their own in the HoC. However it only requires a very small swing to upturn the result of the referendum.

As for your statement "There's every chance the answer comes back unchanged".... that holds 0 ground. Because it certainly won't be the same question asked. We're past Leave - Remain. There's 3 options now: Revoke, Sign the WAB, No Deal. Which of the 3 (maybe all 3?) we would see in a ballot would be the subject of negotiation. Obviously Lib Dems want to see no-deal removed and that's part of the price for supporting an interim govt.

So please, explain to me how a 2nd Ref with no-deal off the table could deliver worse results for Remainers and the Lib Dems than a GE? The worst case scenario of such a 2nd Referendum (WAB signing) is actually a better result than Corbyn trying his own hand at Brexit over the next 3-4 years. In fact, even with all 3 options on the ballot and an STV system, the chance of a no-deal result would be considerably smaller than the chance of another Tory govt emerging from the GE to push ahead with no-deal.
Click to expand...

Having read what you've put you're probably right about the Lib Dems rationale. I still don't see a second referendum passing before a GE though. That's my main point. The Lib Dems are probably going to have to accept that reality; unless they truly are prepared to accept No Deal. With the present state of the HoC I'd say it's almost impossible to secure a temporary government that is able to both agree upon the details of a second referendum and pass the necessary legislation for it, even if Labour backs it wholeheartedly.
 
BobbyManc said:
Having read what you've put you're probably right about the Lib Dems rationale. I still don't see a second referendum passing before a GE though. That's my main point. The Lib Dems are probably going to have to accept that reality; unless they truly are prepared to accept No Deal. With the present state of the HoC I'd say it's almost impossible to secure a temporary government that is able to both agree upon the details of a second referendum and pass the necessary legislation for it, even if Labour backs it wholeheartedly.
Click to expand...

That depends on how many the Tory Rebels are. And the number of rebels will depend upon what is offered. And regardless of what Swinson does, she only has 14 MPs, Corbyn will need the SNP and some Tory rebels anyway. Otherwise there's no temp govt, GE doesn't happen and Boris stays on until the Queen sacks him even if he loses the no confidence. And the Queen won't sack him.

Those Tory rebels are obviously not very keen to put Corbyn at #10. And some would probably feel that by going to the polls while they are openly rebelling against their own party, they might be at high risk of deselection. Whereas more Tory MPs could probably support an interim government under Clarke that goes for a referendum first, implements the result, and then goes for a GE after.

Corbyn's main agenda anyway is social reform and Brexit gets in the way of this, particularly as it's a divisive issue within his own electorate more so than others'. His lukewarm stance, trying to appease both, is driving him and Labour down in the polls. Going into a GE with Brexit democratically "sorted" should be a reprieve for him. But I fear he prefers the crash and burn of no-deal because a) he's a brexiteer and b) he feels that Tories and Lib Dems would suffer in a post-no deal GE more than himself is suffering at the moment.

He probably feels he could recapture a lot of the current swing towards the Lib Dems due to Brexit becoming the dominant issue. Once that's done and Lib Dems have failed at their mission statement, why vote for them? But obviously his attempt at social reform would be doomed if Britain is suffering from post-no deal, harsh recession. He must know this. So I have to wonder if his personal ambition to become PM is overriding his morals, as has happened with BoJo.
 
Last edited:
WensleyMU said:
The UK is FAR from blameless. Incompetence is the word which best describes the UK parliament(s).
Click to expand...
Is not only that is FAR form blameless. Is the main culprit of the situation by FAR and you seem to say that is the EU
 
Last edited:
MadMike said:
That depends on how many the Tory Rebels are. And the number of rebels will depend upon what is offered. And regardless of what Swinson does, she only has 14 MPs, Corbyn will need the SNP and some Tory rebels anyway. Otherwise there's no temp govt, GE doesn't happen and Boris stays on until the Queen sacks him even if he loses the no confidence. And the Queen won't sack him.

Those Tory rebels are obviously not very keen to put Corbyn at #10. And some would probably feel that by going to the polls while they are openly rebelling against their own party, they might be at high risk of deselection. Whereas more Tory MPs could probably support an interim government under Clarke that goes for a referendum first, implements the result, and then goes for a GE after.

Corbyn's main agenda anyway is social reform and Brexit gets in the way of this, particularly as it's a divisive issue within his own electorate more so than others'. His lukewarm stance, trying to appease both, is driving him and Labour down in the polls. Going into a GE with Brexit democratically "sorted" should be a reprieve for him. But I fear he prefers the crash and burn of no-deal because a) he's a brexiteer and b) he feels that Tories and Lib Dems would suffer in a post-no deal GE more than himself is suffering at the moment.

He probably feels he could recapture a lot of the current swing towards the Lib Dems due to Brexit becoming the dominant issue. Once that's done and Lib Dems have failed at their mission statement, why vote for them? But obviously his attempt at social reform would be doomed if Britain is suffering from post-no deal, harsh recession. He must know this. So I have to wonder if his personal ambition to become PM is overriding his morals, as has happened with BoJo.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all convinced by this. I think the vast majority of Tories would find it much easier to accept a GE than back a second referendum. That's why I see a compromise involving a figure like Clarke leading a temporary government that agrees upon a GE as the most likely way out. There's a reason the bookies have a referendum as preceding an election at about 6/1, and a general election heavily odds on. I mean Clarke himself hasn't even come out in favour of another referendum, has he? He doesn't seem to want to entertain the idea. You'd have to support Remain to favour a second referendum, whereas you don't to accept the need for a GE, hence that's more likely to win the backing of some Tories.

I don't agree that Corbyn is playing for a No Deal, either. In fact I think he'd be aware that he would be held as accountable for it as anyone else is, the media and the other politicians would make sure of that. He's obviously going to try and gain as much political capital from the situation as he can right now, but to actually work towards No Deal? I don't think he could survive that. He'd suffer as much as anyone else, and the most likely result I'd suspect would that he would be ousted as Labour leader. I'm a supporter but he certainly would lose my backing if I believed that he favoured No Deal and he rejected viable compromises to prevent it.
 
Stanley Road said:
Dont rules say the leader of the opposition has to take charge of a temp govt in these circumstances? So forget compromise and ken clarke
Click to expand...

I'm not sure there are any rules for situations like this actually, it's only based on a precedent basically that the leader of the opposition does so for obvious reasons. As far as I'm aware it can be anybody so long as they can demonstrate that they can command a majority in the HoC.
 
BobbyManc said:
I'm not sure there are any rules for situations like this actually, it's only based on a precedent basically that the leader of the opposition does so for obvious reasons. As far as I'm aware it can be anybody so long as they can demonstrate that they can command a majority in the HoC.
Click to expand...
Which 'rules' Corbyn out for a start. :)
 
Stanley Road said:
Dont rules say the leader of the opposition has to take charge of a temp govt in these circumstances? So forget compromise and ken clarke
Click to expand...
No it says an MP who can command a majority in the house

Also I think people need to realise that to pass the legistlation for a referendum, get the question format and wording approved plus have the proper run in period is at least 6 months ... Assuming no legal challenge to the question (suspect there will be) then organise another ge will be probably a year or so the temp government is in charge... Probably with a small majority and probably with multiple confidence challenges and brexit MP's trying every parliamentary trick to take control again... It will be messy

But any mp who could command a majority .. so not Corbyn I'd say
 
Timeline?

Aug 21-24... Bang on about removing backstop
Aug 24-27... G7 summit ... Showpiece row with merkle and macron whilst getting trump to make some vague promice of a quick trade deal
Aug 28-30... Whip up EU hatred... Talk about no deal now being almost certain and blame EU... Talk about remoaner parliament blocking no deal
Aug 31 / SEP 1... give farrage a backhander to step the brexit party down and hit the media all weekend about remoners and the EU trying to trap us
Sep 2... Big Boris speach announcing that the first thing in parliament will be a vote on a ge so the country can stick 2 fingers up to the EU and remoaners (plus stops Corbyn calling for a confidence motion on 3rd)

Gut feel call the election on 30th October ... That way it's basically leave Vs remain and makes any hung parliament negotiations between remain parties virtually impossible by 31st

Gut feel I have then is

Labour refuses to join the remain alliance
Brexit party stands down if conservatives deselect a hit list of remoaners
Conservatives win majority
Labour secure less seats than remain alliance

Does that sound about right to anybody else
 
sglowrider said:
The perfect example of a vast majority of Brexiteerr aka Scapegoaters.
Click to expand...

Was he even challenged on this in longer clips? Media love the clicks this attitude generates but have to see by not doing so they are seriously complicit? If all the bullshit and bluster was challenged years ago and called out we might be in a different place
 
Oldyella said:
Was he even challenged on this in longer clips? Media love the clicks this attitude generates but have to see by not doing so they are seriously complicit? If all the bullshit and bluster was challenged years ago and called out we might be in a different place
Click to expand...

You can't challenge these people. Even if you use facts and common sense the standard response will be "well that's just my opinion and i'm entitled to it." Idiocracy is here for the foreseeable.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
You can't challenge these people. Even if you use facts and common sense the standard response will be "well that's just my opinion and i'm entitled to it." Idiocracy is here for the foreseeable.
Click to expand...

More than likely. If people had been challenged and told when they were factually incorrect from the start though it may have been different. People are welcome to their opinion but when its wrong they should be told.
 
ECcYbfoWkAEa_zM.jpg
 
Who cares who Trump blames? Being blamed by Trump is fast becoming a badge of honor.
 
sun_tzu said:
I didn't say he could... I said that he would say any problems from hard brexit are the EU's fault in responce to the comment that everybody would blame the uk
Click to expand...

In the event of a no deal outcome, then the 'blame game' may just wither, its like after a penalty shoot out blaming the guy who missed the vital penalty, it doesn't change the outcome, just leaves the person who missed with massive regrets. That's why both sides are sticking to their guns until the final scene, no one wants to be the guy walking back to the centre having missed the vital pen.

With the last couple of months of extra time running out and the EU saying any deal can only be done if it includes the backstop and the UK saying any deal that might be done cannot include the backstop, then it certainly looks like its going to penalties, probably sudden death!
 
CassiusClaymore said:
You can't challenge these people. Even if you use facts and common sense the standard response will be "well that's just my opinion and i'm entitled to it." Idiocracy is here for the foreseeable.
Click to expand...

This.

If questioned, I am sure the fool will just repeat the same old debunked lines but only louder.
 
Adisa said:
I'm dying here. :lol:
Click to expand...


I thought that it was way too stupid to deserve a comment but I do wonder how he came to that conclusion. He is supposed to be a football expert, one of the hundreds of people at the top of the game worldwide.
 
UweBein said:
I actually liked Ian Holloway.... bloody hell... his parents should have used a condom
Click to expand...

I read his autobiography years ago and ended up disliking him after it which is quite a remarkable achievement. The main thing I remembered was every time he failed at a club there was always something or someone else to blame but himself.
 
BobbyManc said:
I read his autobiography years ago and ended up disliking him after it which is quite a remarkable achievement. The main thing I remembered was every time he failed at a club there was always something or someone else to blame but himself.
Click to expand...

"Nothing wrong with my book. The bertie probably can't read.
 
DavidDeSchmikes said:
Click to expand...

do they have the votes for a no confidence vote?
would be close i think - but im sure plenty of those same people wouldnt then back corbyn
he really should have backed the libs no confidence motion before parliament broke up as all that has happened is the clock has run down making a default no deal brexit much more likely - it almost like it was planned:smirk:
 
I realize that I don't know what is the position of Labour and Lib Dems concerning the withdrawal agreement.
 
sun_tzu said:
do they have the votes for a no confidence vote?
would be close i think - but im sure plenty of those same people wouldnt then back corbyn
he really should have backed the libs no confidence motion before parliament broke up as all that has happened is the clock has run down making a default no deal brexit much more likely - it almost like it was planned:smirk:
Click to expand...

That would have literally made no difference. It was never going to pass. The Lib Dems knew that and it was purely a tactic to get one over on Labour.
 
So, Merkel gives BoJo 30 days to come up with a detailed, workable and acceptable alternative to the back stop. They have spent the past 2 years trying to come up with a solution so I won’t hold my breathe. Let’s hope I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.